FWIW, a slogan like “for everyone” might ring more true if the 32 bit 2016.06.18 ISO links still worked.
[ antergos(dot)com/blog/iso-refresh-2016-06-18/ ]
For various reasons some of us are still trying to make use of old 32 bit hardware. Even just working torrent links and an active web seed would be nice. One might file them under a ‘Legacy’ link or some such.

I understand that for the ever changing main releases there’s sensibly some sort system in place to keep mirrors up to date with whatever the latest current version happens to be and that the nature of such lets old stuff fall aside rather than maintaining an archive of older versions. I’ve read the ‘Can’t find 32-bit downloads’ thread (forum(dot)antergos(dot com)/topic/4813/can-t-find-32-bit-downloads).

I’m not suggesting that such be replaced or forced to change just to accommodate those—relatively few—of us who still desire access to the last stable 32 bit images. What I’m suggesting is that as no new 32 bit images are anticipated the nature of hosting the last remaining release (2016.06.18) changes from facilitating a dynamic scenario to accommodating a static one—which seems to me to open up ways to alternative hosting algorithms.

Hosting a couple of torrent files or even just a pair of ‘magnet links’—‘full’ and ‘minimal’ versions—somewhere on the main site seems like it would introduce little-to-no extra bandwidth burden directly and then a ‘web seed’ could be setup somewhere to insure that at least one seeder is always available. [ Free hosting, benevolent Antergos dev, whatever. [ Here someone suggests a way to do it with Dropbox: absolutegizmos(dot com)/seed-your-torrents-with-a-free-seedbox-without-using-your-own-computer ]

“The advantage, of course, is that a publisher can create a torrent of a file which is already hosted on his server and not worry about seeding it full time, while the user can obtain the data directly from the […] source or through the torrent.”
bittorrentwebseeds(dot)blogspot(dot com)

Alternately, one might just host copies of the static 32 bit 2016.06.18 ‘full’ and ‘minimal’ ISOs on SourceForge in a separate directory from the current ever changing 64 bit release. I’m presuming this is an option as other distros archive old releases there. If there’s some objection to SourceForge (who already hosts the current releases) use some other hosting/distribution service. Lack of options doesn’t seem to be the challenge here.

It seems to me it just requires a will to make Antergos indeed available “for everyone”, even those of us still using 32 bit hardware.

Ah, tnx @joekamprad, I was unaware that upstream Arch is in process of dropping 32 bit support as well. I suppose expecting a distro family known for offering cutting edge packages to keep supporting dinosaurs may have been unrealistic. ;)

Yep, as per the Antergos blog post I attempted to link in my first post. (spelled it out best I could, this forum’s spam filter was rejecting URL syntax)

maintaining a 32bit Antergos is out of the question

I wasn’t suggesting anyone maintain anything more than torrent seeds of the 2016.06.18 releases.

Would totally understand if they were provided with caveats that support had expired and downloaders would be on their own and were not to make old 32 bit release support inquiries in Antergos forums, IRC, etc. so as to avoid burdening the current support network. But I understand that in light of upstream dropping support soon this is largely moot at this point.

I’m playing with some old Compaq TC1000/TC1100 TabletPCs that are being distro finicky and am wanting to try something Arch based as an option. I’m largely just seeking to turn them into ebook readers so getting something static set up that plays nice with the hardware would likely suffice. (ie. updates wouldn’t really be an issue after initial setup)

If anyone is feeling benevolent and still has a copy of the last 32 bit minimal ISO, antergos-minimal-2016.06.18-i686.iso, tucked away that they’re willing to share personally please message me to make arrangements.

In this case, yes… I assumed that since @just had posted it (and it came from a site I have used before in addition to being an old ISO by the Antergos devs) that it was fine. I really don’t have the time to extensively test it right now, but if someone else does, that would be great. And thank you for that reminder to test it, @anarch! I had forgotten to announce that it was UNTESTED.